Petition on 38 degrees

[jenlyn]

Of course not , that is freedom of choice ... that freedom of choice doesnt extend to taking the p being a CMer and avoiding paying for a permanent mooring though

 

Rick

Life can be so simple eh.

A pity not all can be as lucky as yourself. :-)

[boathunter]

Of course not , that is freedom of choice ... that freedom of choice doesnt extend to taking the p being a CMer and avoiding paying for a permanent mooring though

 

Rick

Where exactly do you draw the line?

[dccruiser]

Life can be so simple eh.

A pity not all can be as lucky as yourself. :-)

It depends which way you look at it , rules are simple, follow them no hassle, choose to flaunt them then accept the possible consequences.

 

As for myself, i am lucky as i am alive unlike a number of guys i served with in the forces, unlucky because i came away disabled, me being glass half full go with lucky....as for anything i have in life i have worked day and night to get it, i have in the past lost everything and had to start again with nothing, just because i am comfortable now doesnt mean i cannot say what i think of anyone who chooses a situation then moans about it when they come unstuck.

 

Rick

Where exactly do you draw the line?

I draw the very clear line that exsists between anyone that is a CMer and those that genuinly CC .... and if you really dont understand that line you havent read my posts

 

Rick

[jenlyn]

 

As for myself, i am lucky as i am alive unlike a number of guys i served with in the forces, unlucky because i came away disabled, me being glass half full go with lucky....as for anything i have in life i have worked day and night to get it, i have in the past lost everything and had to start again with nothing.

 

Rick

Couple of things,

1.Been there, done that. (Twice with the lost everything.)

2.Have never felt the necessity to bring it on here.

It just doesn't fit ;-)

sorry.

I still find the compassion to see that others can be worse off than myself, without being judgemental before knowing all the circumstances.

What part of Eaton are you from?

[dccruiser]

Couple of things,

1.Been there, done that. (Twice with the lost everything.)

2.Have never felt the necessity to bring it on here.

It just doesn't fit ;-)

sorry.

I still find the compassion to see that others can be worse off than myself, without being judgemental before knowing all the circumstances.

What part of Eaton are you from?

Dont be sorry,i only mentioned it as a validation that i know what it is like to have nothing at all ... so i am not viewed as being lucky and not being in touch with reality.

 

I have the utmost compassion for those less off than myself, as i mentioned in another thread i worked for various aid organisations for several years throughout the third world and i assure you it wasnt for financial remuneration!

 

may i ask why you mention Eaton?

 

Rick

[jenlyn]

Dont be sorry,i only mentioned it as a validation that i know what it is like to have nothing at all ... so i am not viewed as being lucky and not being in touch with reality.

 

I have the utmost compassion for those less off than myself, as i mentioned in another thread i worked for various aid organisations for several years throughout the third world and i assure you it wasnt for financial remuneration!

 

may i ask why you mention Eaton?

 

Rick

Strange posts, and very judgemental from someone with such a wealth of experience.

How many of these CMers have you ever met, and how many have you taken the time to talk to.

 

If you had the choice of living under a bridge, or the chance of a cheap roof over your head, let's say a boat, which would you take?

 

With such right wing views, I thought maybe you were from Eaton.

[Wanderer Vagabond]

Strange posts, and very judgemental from someone with such a wealth of experience.

How many of these CMers have you ever met, and how many have you taken the time to talk to.

 

If you had the choice of living under a bridge, or the chance of a cheap roof over your head, let's say a boat, which would you take?

 

With such right wing views, I thought maybe you were from Eaton.

Would that be Eaton, Herefordshire; Eaton, Cheshire; Eaton, Leicestershire or did you perhaps mean Eton??

Edited February 21, 2015 by Wanderer Vagabond

[dccruiser]

Strange posts, and very judgemental from someone with such a wealth of experience.

How many of these CMers have you ever met, and how many have you taken the time to talk to.

 

If you had the choice of living under a bridge, or the chance of a cheap roof over your head, let's say a boat, which would you take?

 

With such right wing views, I thought maybe you were from Eaton.

I have spoke to quite a few CMers over the years

 

I dont see any validity in the question,... live under a bridge or ... instead of a boat, lets say it was a squat that belonged to someone who had gone legitimately CC'ing .... who's side would you be arguing on then?

 

OOps missed one! .... when did not condoning someone breaking the rules make a person right wing? i think if you look back through history towing the party line is very much a left wing philosophy

 

Rick

Would that be Eaton, Herefordshire; Eaton, Cheshire; Eaton, Leicestershire or did you perhaps mean Eton??

I thought he meant Long |Eaton as i am moored in Sawley!

 

Rick

Edited February 21, 2015 by dccruiser

[jenlyn]

Would that be Eaton, Herefordshire; Eaton, Cheshire; Eaton, Leicestershire or did you perhaps mean Eton??

Predictive txt (rolls eyes) Eton, are you dccruiser then or have you decided to join in again? :-)

I have spoke to quite a few CMers over the years

 

I dont see any validity in the question

 

 

Rick

Obviously not.

However, for some, that is the only option. Seemingly, you are happy to deny them.

Strange behaviour from someone with your background.

[MtB]

They are just trying to wind you up DC.

 

Chill.

[dccruiser]

They are just trying to wind you up DC.

 

Chill.

I am perfectly chilled Mike, i actually find it amusing , they either only quote half a sentence or ignore any direct question

 

Rick

[Wanderer Vagabond]

Predictive txt (rolls eyes) Eton, are you dccruiser then or have you decided to join in again? :-)

 

Er, public discussion board means I think we can all play, if you want private discussions then there are other options!

[MtB]

I am perfectly chilled Mike, i actually find it amusing , they either only quote half a sentence or ignore any direct question

 

Rick

 

 

Good.

 

(You realise these are the two guys who started the ACC?)

[dccruiser]

 

 

Good.

 

(You realise these are the two guys who started the ACC?)

Yes Mike , someone pointed that out to me on a previous thread ....so who represents the ACM? pmsl

 

Rick

[Ange]

I think setting distance requirements would spoil the whole CC experience. I didn't document our mileage in 2009 or 2010 but I know we travelled a lot of miles and quite a few waterways. In 2011 we did nearly 800 miles and in 2012 over 700. In 2013 we decided we were fed up with charging around and never properly visiting an area so we had a leisurely cruise from Worcester to Stoke via the Anderson Lift - I think our total distance travelled was just over 100 miles (I didn't write it down but that's what springs to mind from when I worked it out)

 

Since then we've been on paid for moorings, either winter mooring as we are now or in a marina as I've had to get a job to replenish the coffers before we set off again this summer.

 

The beauty of ccing is freedom of choice - do we stay here for 14 days, get the pink maps out and have a proper explore, or shall we move on. Dictating distances would undermine that freedom.

 

ETA sorry should have said I'm referring particularly to distances like 500 miles cited earlier

Edited February 22, 2015 by Ange

[Maffi]

Maybe there should be a petition that licence payers be members and have a say in management.

Licence payers are customers not members.

[dmr]

i'm with Ange on this.

CC'ing is about freedom, so rules about mileage, ABC cruising patterns, and no return times spoil this totally.

I suspect we break a lot of rules, I like to spend a month or two going up and down the same stretch.

We don't record our mileage but I suspect its over a 1000 each year so even the IWA should be happy with us.

I actually think we move Too much and don't spend enough time exploring each place we visit.

I really don't want to see a 500 miles per year minimum,

 

...........Dave

[Paul C]

 

"Initially we will focus on those who, having declared they will continuously cruise, move the least, including a number of boats that barely move at all."

 

Taken from here: https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/news-and-views/news/policy-outlined-for-boaters-without-a-home-mooring

 

Thanks for the clarification and the link. Yes, read in isolation it does look a bit draconian, but in the context of the whole article - doesn't (look draconian). I think a lot of it is down to how you interpret or comprehend the CRT article.

[Maffi]

If anyone thinks that this petition is going to make the slightest difference to how this government handles the housing situation, they are away with the fairies. Signing a petition about X in the hope that it will achieve Z is laughable!!!

 

This is a petition about boaters who I am thinking are nowhere near the top of the list of government priorities, if they are even on the list.

 

The language in the petition is designed, poorly so, to raise emotions and mislead.

 

The petition has been written specifically to get the Ahhhhh factor for the 'families' and the BOO! factor for the CRT. It is appalling!

 

As has been said earlier 'itinerants move about' when they stop moving they are no longer itinerants!

 

Unique is relative to 'the only one' so given that there are many of them unique doesn't apply.

 

If CRT refuse a licence to a boat it has not made them homeless they themselves, by their failure to abide by the rules which they signed in agreement, have done that.

 

If my memory serves me well the rules have always said "If you need to be in one place for work or schooling then CCing is not an option you should be thinking of."

 

No one is evicting them they are simply no being allowed to stay on CRT water. They can keep their boats, just not on the canals. They could go to the Thames. See how they get on against the PLA or the EA.

 

I have said on the petition that I will not sign and why. My comments, I believe, have been removed. Democracy is dead.

Edited February 22, 2015 by Maffi

[Jamboat]

I would love to know, reasonably accurately, how many boats are lived on. Take away the number of boats with residential moorings and see just how many boats are used outside the rules.

Erm... not having a home mooring makes us rule breakers ?

We live aboard & cruise the system, never staying anywhere longer than a few days, what is your issue with that ?

& fwiw I also wouldn't sign, C&RT are not landlords, we knew the deal when we bought our boat & if something prevented us from cc'ing we would take a mooring.

[MtB]

Erm... not having a home mooring makes us rule breakers ?

We live aboard & cruise the system, never staying anywhere longer than a few days, what is your issue with that ?

& fwiw I also wouldn't sign, C&RT are not landlords, we knew the deal when we bought our boat & if something prevented us from cc'ing we would take a mooring.

 

 

I think you have misunderstood. (Or I have!)

 

The 'rule breakers' are the liveaboard boaters living on a leisure home mooring.

[Tom Richmond]

 

Thanks for the clarification and the link. Yes, read in isolation it does look a bit draconian, but in the context of the whole article - doesn't (look draconian). I think a lot of it is down to how you interpret or comprehend the CRT article.

 

I am inclined to agree, however, my initial point was made purely in regard to the intention of the petition. The intention of the petition is based on the fear that the above statement (in it's isolation) becomes core to CRT's operational procedure.

 

I have to agree with MtB's comments earlier in this thread too, having re-read the CRT statement. It seems unlikely that they would engage in enforcement against anyone without first contacting them and giving them chance to change their cruising patterns. I may have implied otherwise earlier...

 

As to what (if anything) CRT are going to achieve by targetting the people who move the least, well, they are going to make people homeless. Many of these people are unlikely to be able to afford a mooring, so they will be off their boats and getting in touch with their local housing authority. It is sweeping a problem under the rug.

[MtB]

 

As to what (if anything) CRT are going to achieve by targetting the people who move the least, well, they are going to make people homeless. Many of these people are unlikely to be able to afford a mooring, so they will be off their boats and getting in touch with their local housing authority. It is sweeping a problem under the rug.

 

 

Once again Tom I have to disagree with you. These people are making themselves intentionally homeless by failing to abide by the terms and conditions they signed up to.

 

It is analogous to rental accommodation on the bank. If tenants have their tenancy agreements terminated and a possession order is granted by a court for failing to meet the terms and conditions (usually failing to pay the rent but not always - antisocial behaviour is another, and there are plenty more), they are deemed to have made themselves intentionally homeless. They don't qualify for housing benefit or emergency accommodation fro the council housing dept.

 

I think when CRT go to court for rubber stamping of a Section 8, there is very little difference. The (ex)licence holder made themselves intentionally homeless.

 

MtB

 

 

 

P.S. Notwithstanding the point already made they still have the boat and are free to live on it on the Thames, the hard standing or anywhere else

 

A couple of years ago I was driving through countryside nowhere near any water. In my peripheral vision I thought I saw a dutch barge through a gap in the hedgerow. I stopped the van and went back to check and yes, there was a DB about 100ft long set up in a field and clearly being lived on from the vehicles parked around it, the washing fluttering on the line on deck and kids bikes everwhere!

Edited February 22, 2015 by Mike the Boilerman

[Maffi]

Here are some of the comments from the petition:

 

The CRT bowing to the demands of the middle class/marina moored types that are boat owners these days. Where were they when the canals faced closure and the liveaboards fought tooth and nail to keep them open?

 

I know people who live on the river, and they have no other place to go. The kids need to go to school, and can't if they have to move as far as CART would like them to.

 

Without all the people that live onboard along the Canal system, there would be no canal system. Been living aboard for 10+ years

 

I am sick of our freedom's being eroded all the time, if someone chooses to live on the water they should be allowed to without interference from an "authority".

 

There is no reason on earth why some people should be made to 'move on'.

 

Those who live on boats need to be able to stay in one place for access to schools, doctors, work etc. Those who live on their boats are the lifeblood of the canal system

Well they would say that wouldn't they?

[Athy]

 

 

 

As to what (if anything) CRT are going to achieve by targetting the people who move the least, well, they are going to make people homeless.

That's a rather negative view. Perhaps they will achieve the effect of making those boaters move more, which is surely the object of the exercise.